Agenda - Council - 08/25/2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POLICY BOARD BUSINESS Case 41: Review Goals & Policies for Lower Rum River Water Management Organization's 3rd Generation Plan Environmental Coordinator Anderson presented the staff report. Chairperson Max stated that Best Management Practices (BMPs) are referred to in the document but are not identified or defined anywhere within the document. Maybe there should be at least a reference to where BMPs can be found, such as the Pollution Control Agency or MN Department of Transportation. Board Member Enstrom stated that he sees some conflict in the draft goals and policies where water conservation is a goal but vegetation around a wetland is a policy, which would have the effect of wicking away water from wetlands. Assistant City Engineer Jankowski stated that the goal is to return storm water run-off rates back to 1988 levels. Environmental Coordinator Anderson asked how we would determine what the 1988 run-off rates were in the city. Assistant City Engineer Jankowski stated that it would likely be determined through some sort of modeling and that the surface water management plan recently completed may have some models that could be used. Board Member Enstrom stated that he thinks more information is needed before he can make any type of recommendation regarding the LRRWMO's 3rd Generation Plan. Board Member Hassett inquired about whether there was anything that maybe should be included in this plan even if it is known that nothing would be done with it in the next 10 years, to sort of plant the seed of a future goal and/or project. Chairperson Max stated that he has some concern with policies 3.4 and 3.5, which he agrees with but believes that they should just refer to any invasive species identified by the MN DNR rather than singling out two specific invasive species. Chairperson Max stated that he also has some concern with specifically requiring buffers considering that City Council recently repealed the buffer standards that were in city code. Board Member Enstrom stated that you have to look at each member city and their development potential. He stated that while Coon Rapids does have a buffer requirement, that city is almost completely built'out and thus, that requirement doesn't mean a whole lot. Furthermore, the enactment of the new topsoil requirements in Ramsey would serve in a similar capacity to a vegetated buffer. Environmental Policy Board / July 20, 2009 Page 2 of 3